MovieChat Forums > Masters of Horror (2005) Discussion > Horror? Really?

Horror? Really?

posted 13 years ago by Lorelaisimpson
12 replies | jump to latest

Why was the series called Masters of Horror?
Despite the fact that all episodes were based in horror stories, most of the episodes seemed more like parodies and satires.
Cigarette Burns is the only episode that I consider to be horrifying. The plot, performances, concept had the elements of a good horror film.
Imprint was nothing but a sexploitation episode. No horror just beautiful asian woman tortured.
Family had a promising beginning but in the end it reminded me more of a tales of the crypt episode that an actual horror story. I admit that I expected the crypt keeper to appear and finish the story with an actual sarcastic comment but sadly this did not happen.
Dance of the dead: a poor adaptation of the original Mathseon stoty but I guess I liked it because I am a Matheson and Englund fan.
Washingtonians: An opportunity for the series to create an episode that contained elements both from horror and black comedy. The episode was... campy.

What I don't understand is what were they thinking when they made the series. The episodes are not scary enough to be regarded as horror and not satirical enough to be considered black comedy.

[–] TheatreNachos 13 years ago

If you started watching the anthology believing you were going to see groundbreaking horror stories or the like, of course you were disappointed. This series has some great stories though; there are some fails too. The problem with horror is that it's completely subjective; the viewer may find some topics "scarier" than others. But, if the series just isn't doing it for you, perhaps it's time to find another.

[–] Danimal_77 11 years ago

This wasn't an anthology. They were all separate mini 1 hour horror stories unto themselves. An anthology is ONE movie, with 3-6 short stories in it, tied in with a wraparound story linking them all together.

[–] DonJohn80 11 years ago

If you want to split hairs anthology is defined in a purely literal sense, but more modern definitions of the term include series like Alfred Hitchcock Presents and Tales From The Crypt. There's also NEVER been any definition I've seen that says the frame story is required. It's just most common.

[–] toretorden 13 years ago

I largely agree with you. It's an interesting idea; getting famous horror directors to make episodes for a horror show, but then most episodes end up being campy or goofy, full of unintentional comedy or just plain weird - just like so many of their movies are come to think of it. The redeeming thing for me is I don't really require horror to scare me, just entertain. Watching old classics like "A Nightmare on Elm Street" or "Halloween" doesn't really scare me either, but it's still enjoyable.

My favourite episode so far is Haeckel's Tale. It was fun with a relatively good cast for the series and suitably grotesque as well :) And yes, I've seen Cigarette Burns, Imprint and Homecoming!

[–] Lorelaisimpson 13 years ago

I forgot about Homecoming. One of the few good episodes.
Horror doesn't necessary mean that you can't sleep because you are afraid of what you just saw on TV. It is also about making you feel uncomfortable about a certain thing or issue.
For example both family and Phycho were based on a short story by Robert Bloch.
Hitchcock adapted the story to a film which is about phychosis, neurosis and ever since shower have been associated with murder.
Family was just...campy. It just lacked the element of uneasiness, it didn't made you feel sad, angry or afraid, one way or another.
Twilight Zone episodes succeded because they managed to make the viewer uncomfortable. They were more subtle but also more effective. Compare Homecoming to the Invaders episode with Agnes Moorhead.

[–] Danimal_77 11 years ago

I understand the point you're trying to make, but in all fairness, while The Twilight Zone was a high quality show, far from all the Twilight Zones succeeded or were more effective.

[–] Oddark123 13 years ago

Then you grow up and realize nothing about a movie will ever be scary

[–] dwillsxbr 13 years ago

Oh come now what about Pelts?
Meatloaf cutting and peeling off his own skin for his girlfriend.
The scene when the man cut off his face in the bear trap.
The woman taking a sewing needle and thread to her face
ending when she sewed her mouth shut and suffocated.
That was an unforgettable episode better than most
so called horror films.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Agnelin 11 years ago

I believe it was called Masters of Horror because they assembled a bunch of very good directors in the genre. Some of the best alive, as well as some interesting new talents.

Unfortunately, the show's quality was not so good, as an average. But this means that some episodes (in my opinion) were great. In my opinion, too, even the mediocre episodes have something about them that makes them worth watching.

[–] adamatomic41 11 years ago

In case you haven't noticed, the entire horror genre is no longer about being scary... it's all about gore. It doesn't matter how stupid or comical it is; as long as they throw in a lot of blood, it's considered "horror."